Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Celeron G1610 outperforms the more expensive FX-8120 on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Celeron G1610 is 418 days newer than the more expensive FX-8120.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1610
- Performs up to 0% better in Minecraft than FX-8120 - 598 vs 596 FPS
- Up to 7% cheaper than FX-8120 - $37.0 vs $39.99
- Up to 14% better value when playing Minecraft than FX-8120 - $0.06 vs $0.07 per FPS
- Consumes up to 56% less energy than AMD FX-8120 - 55 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8120 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-8120
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1610 - 8 vs 2 threads
Minecraft
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
FPS
598
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.06/FPS
100%
Price, $
$37
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for $37 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 61 minutes ago
Buy for $39.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 62 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G1610 | vs | AMD FX-8120 |
---|---|---|
Dec 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Oct 12th, 2011 |
Celeron | Collection | FX |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Zambezi |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 8 |
2 | Threads | 8 |
2.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.1 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.4 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 125 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
26.0x | Multiplier | 15.5x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |